I’m not a man that holds a grudge against someone for their opinion. I don’t get upset if someone gets something out of Tome of the Undergates that I didn’t intend them to. That’s part of the allure of writing. I don’t get upset if someone doesn’t like the book, either; any piece of art is going to be subjective and not every piece is for everybody. Criticism, too, can be useful to a writer. Assuming it’s presented in a way that an author can actually look at without emotionally ripping himself apart, a lot of writers benefit from eloquent, exemplified discussions of where they can improve on.
This doesn’t apply exclusively to Tome of the Undergates, either. A lot of writers improve greatly when their work is scrutinized. When we have a problem is when the criticism is not helpful. While browsing a few of my fellow authors’ critiques, I happened to notice a rather disturbing trend in the commentary. Namely, that a lot of the criticism boiled down to the following statement:
“He’s not George R.R. Martin/Joe Abercrombie/Gene Wolfe/China Mieville.”
This sort of commentary got me thinking. A standard complaint leveled against fantasy and its readers is that every book is the same: it’s the same story of good and evil, the same characters of hero and villain, the same format of questing for good times, the same result of saving the world. This is a view I patently reject: as I discussed over at Pat’s Fantasy Hotlist last week, I think readers and authors alike have come to the point where we not only can accept different stories, we demand them. As such, you’re quite unlike to read two fantasy stories that are like each other. The genre has benefited from this.
At the same time, however, a different kind of demand has come up, and I think it’s not doing any of us a lick of good.
We compare authors all the time; hell, my publishers do it for me. It’s the easiest way to summarize an author and to get another person interested in their book or to explain that said book just isn’t for them. To say “Author A is like/similar/evokes feelings of Author B” is a fine and apt thing to say…so long as it stops there and is taken as no more than that: a suggestion that Author A might have a style similar to Author B. Where the danger comes in is when this is taken too literally, when the major complaint becomes someone feeling betrayed because, no matter how alike they might seem, Author A is not Author B.
George R.R. Martin is a unique voice. Mark Charan Newton is a unique voice. Robin Hobb is a unique voice. The same goes for Scott Lynch, Joe Abercrombie, Peter V. Brett, Brent Weeks and many, many more. They can’t help but be unique voices; that’s why they’re authors. If they weren’t unique, they’d be plagiarists. And if their voices weren’t unique, they wouldn’t have found the success they have. Sometimes, these voices don’t work for us. That’s fine. We should feel that the atmosphere of this particular readership is safe and accepting enough that we can say that freely.
What we shouldn’t be doing is treating the atmosphere like an episode of Highlander, in which there can be only one author and everyone who is not him is dirt. Saying “this voice does not work for me” is fine. Saying “this voice does not work for me because this is not Joe Abercrombie’s voice” is not. That’s not a criticism. That’s just unfair. It’s unfair to an author because it’s basically saying that the only way he can succeed is if he’s someone entirely different. It’s unfair to a curious reader because all it does is observe that said author is not someone he never claimed to be. It’s unfair to the readership at large because it cultivates an air that is hostile to authors who are not as established and readers who are not following the established names.
And I’m not slamming the established authors or accusing their readers of being unfair. George, Joe, Scott and China are established for a reason: they’re really, really good at what they do. This is not a call to abandon one’s favorite authors and flock to unproven, untested authors out of fear of making someone else uncomfortable. What this is is a reminder that these guys were also once unestablished, that these guys wouldn’t have gotten so far if they had “you’re not Gene Wolf/Raymond E. Feist/Glen Cook” crammed down their throats.
I’ve said before, and I steadfastly maintain, that fantasy is one of the most diverse genres out there. We have reached a point where the only rule to the genre is “whatever the hell you feel.” I don’t care what any literary critic or award panel says. But while we might have come far enough that we encourage and demand new stories, I feel we’re not doing everything we can to encourage that which makes the stories actually work: the voices.
Again, this is not an attempt to declare the established authors as vile idols that must be toppled. This is not an attempt to declare that new authors are without flaws and you should only say nice things about them. If a voice doesn’t work, it doesn’t work. That’s fine.
Sometimes a guy sucks.
But it’s a hell of a lot more handy if you can tell him he sucks on his own merits.
I liked this blog. But it’s no Mark Charan Newton.
God dammit, that guy stole my intended comment.
I mostly concur, Sam. It’s an especially unhelpful comparison when it’s “[debut author in their 20s] is no [experienced author who’s been doing this for years or decades].” Christ, find some relevant comparisons or cut the poor bastards (or maybe that should be ‘us poor bastards’) some due slack.
Weren’t fast enough Mr. Lynch.
I’m totally biased, but… I KNOW.
I mean, yes, there is that rare and wondrous prodigy who can withstand such comparisons (such as, um, you).
But for the most part, noobs are noobs. I’m sure as hell a noob. I _know_ I suck relative to people who have been doing this longer than I’ve been alive and are at the top of the field. That’s how it’s supposed to be! The world would be a sad sad place if people could do this for 30 years and not be any better at it than I am.
/rant for today.
(grumble snarg, I meant to quote Scott Lynch’s “It’s an especially unhelpful comparison when it’s “[debut author in their 20s] is no [experienced author who’s been doing this for years or decades].”” up there.
Oh well I am bad at the Internets.)
Pingback: Random Thoughts: Recent stuff on young and untested writers – NextRead
I understand the sentiment, I really do, The trouble is those comments are water cooler conversation.
I have a very good friend who is a movie critic. Now, we can have a fantastic conversation on plotting or character arcs or any manner of story-based stuff, but when it comes to direction or cinematography, it bores me rigid. I don’t own the tool set to discuss these things, and I don’t particularly want to. “Look Nick,” I say. “I just liked the explosions, OK!”
It’s natural to talk in comparisons. I don’t know about others but when I (and a lot of people I know) talk about a new movie or TV programme to a friend I usually describe it in terms of what has gone before. And when it comes to the quality of that entertainment product, it’s perfectly normal to compare it against some mutually agreed benchmark. “You liked Serenity, didn’t you? This is as good as that but the CGI isn’t exactly Star Wars”.
Sometimes we don’t know why we like something. For some people (like myself) I have to know; have to have an understanding behind my pleasure. others shrug and say “it’s just good”. Maybe, just like me and my film discussions they have no interest in pulling it apart and analysing it.
And yes, this is unfair, but the consumers of entertainment products owe their creators nothing. There’s no moral contract to like or dislike, nor obligation to quantify that opinion.
It would be great if people could cut authors some slack, especially those readers who have the skill to understand and communicate their opinions. But there’s no obligation. As they say in Hollywood, “that’s entertainment for you”.
I agree. Its the easy way out to discuss an author as a compare to another author unless you intend to use some specific instance. And even then, I am not convinced its necessary. Its obvious they aren’t that author – The clues is the name on the front of the book.
To Adrian Faulkners point-
Water cooler conversation is one thing. Publishing a critical review is different. And to review something based on something else is not helpful to either the author to the person reading the review.
A. Readers haven’t always read what the critic has read and cannot understand the comparison.
b. Readers may not agree with your assessment of the compared standard book. Because they may not have the same opinion, your comparison becomes meaningless to them. It moves you two steps away from making your point.
c. If you are a publishing critic, you are a writer. Its fairly lazy writing to make a comparison to another author. It means you don’t want to come up with the words and phrases necessary to make your point. I didn’t like it, he’s not China Mieville. What does that mean? I already knew it.
I agree, if it’s a critique by someone ‘professional’ (i.e. someone either paid to write it, or running a serious blog or fanzine) then such comparisons are lazy.
Sometimes I can see how comparisons can be useful, even comparisons in a negative sense. But it depends on how they’re being used. To say that New Author A is no Established Author B could be good commentary if, in context, it’s saying that the styles are so different that you may not like New Author A if your thing is stuff by Established Author B.
That being said, it’s still rather pointless to comment on like that, as one would have to list off every established author that New Author A isn’t like, and it would be simpler to just say who they are like, if anyone.
Comparisons can also be used as a sort of benchmark, but again, that all depends on context and it’s often easier to just say flat out what was good and what wasn’t rather than holding them up to somebody else’s achievements.
I admit that I’ve used author comparisons before in reviews, but when I do, it’s usually in the context of, “New Author A feels like they’re trying to be the next Established Author B.” Sometimes it really does feel like some new authors are trying to take what somebody else did before and then go one better, and it doesn’t always work out as well as they hoped.
But it does no good for me to say things like, “Mercedes Lackey is no Robert Jordan.” (Pulling random author names out of my butt there, for an example.” They write differently, they tell stories differently, and they have different ideas. I read both, and like both for different reasons.
Of course, it’s easy to sit on this side of the fence and justify why people may use such comparisons. If and when I take the plunge and start dealing with agents and publishers and all that jazz, I don’t expect I’d be too happy to see a review telling the world that I’m not so-and-so either.
Comparing one author to another is shorthand, and it ca be lazy. But I use it sometimes on reviews because people are wondering who else they’ll like in a similar style to their favourite authors. It’s the basis for all these recommendation systems on Amazon and elsewhere, and I’m sure it helps some people find new authors.
But it is frustrating, especially when so many comic fantasy authors get called the next Pratchett, and then accused of not being the next Pratchett, and so on. It’s no substitute for proper analysis.
Your abject failure to be me is, and will always be, your greatest shortcoming, Sykes. It’s the elephant in the room in any review.
It’s true. I fear I shall never achieve that particular aspiration until I have a picture of myself looking thoughtful in a business suit as if to say: “Look at me readers, I am a very professional man, despite the fact that I’ve had to offer ‘got distracted looking at myself in the mirror’ as an excuse for not finishing my latest book six times now.”
Adrian has made sense with every comment. It is lazy reviewing, but, outside of that context, only human. Comparing book a to book b is shorthand and, in most cases, used positively.
I also think it is honest – readers will like one book more than another, and as long as they’re being up front about it being their own personal taste, that’s perfectly acceptable. It is ok to like… I dunno… (no safe comparison, is there?)… L. Ron Hubbard more than Jane Austen.* But that’s it… I personally like L. Ron Hubbard more than Jane Austen. (And let me tell you, Austen was no Hubbard).**
I suppose adjectives like “better” are where the knives come out…
*That’s not actually ok.
** Thank god.
Pingback: World Wide Wednesday: Minotaurs are the new Vampires! | Fantasy Literature's Fantasy Book Reviews
It IS monetarily useful, however, if we’re compared to wildly commercially popular authors. I’m totally going to start saying that Stephenie Meyer, Stephen King and J. K. Rowling have given cover quotes for your next book.